 |
 |
 |
March 27, 2006 PUBLIC OPINION SURVEYS: A Slippery Slope When facing any difficult financial crisis, school board members and administrators may feel a survey is a good measure of community opinion about educational values. They think that using surveys is a good way to inform people about the seriousness of the situation. However, since community participation is voluntary – and the validity of results will vary depending on public awareness of the survey, trust in the administration, and the content, design and delivery of the survey – surveys may, in fact, jeopardize music programs. Here’s why – along with some suggestions to help your district avoid falling into “The Public Survey Trap.” Why Do Administrators Use Surveys? Surveys are used for many reasons, and not all of them are above-board. Besides informing the public about a financial crisis, the possibility of closing/merging schools in the district, or the need to raise taxes, surveys may also be used to: • Establish a basis for a levy referendum to increase school funding; • Inform (or sometimes threaten) the public about probable cuts if school funding is not increased; • Gauge what community members value most/least so cuts will create the least negative reaction. Surveys are normally distributed to district residents in one or more of the following ways: regular mail (with or without return envelopes); email or downloadable forms (obviously, only to those with Internet access); internal school mail (school employees only); random telephone interviews; and distribution at local PTA or committee meetings, among others. Do you begin to see how access and convenience plays a major role in validity of results? Common Survey Pitfalls Statisticians, marketers and researchers are well aware of the problems associated with improperly conducted surveys. When surveys are not done properly, results can be skewed, non-informative or, worse, invalid. Consider the following dangerous scenarios: • Improper formatting can create a desired response; • Poor wording or unclear definitions can create inaccurate results; • Improperly conducted surveys can reveal the bias or philosophy of the researcher; • Attitudes of the researcher may also be revealed by omission or by lack of solicitation of broader community input; • Location of music categories or programs on the survey can reflect administrative philosophy (ie, music is, or should be, “extra-curricular”); • Music may be listed as a simple line item title from a budget, perhaps using terms or categories not understood by survey participants; • Surveys may reveal a lack of knowledge about the financial viability of music as a curricular entity; • Lack of participation by the community may not be apparent until a complete, impartial analysis of the results is conducted. The primary danger of poorly designed or improperly conducted surveys, however, is that they may still be interpreted as a public mandate – to make cuts in music programs, for example – even if community participation levels are low. If the necessary funding level is not achieved, or if a levy referendum fails to pass, citing survey results can be extremely dangerous for music and the arts. One Case Study Illustrates Several Problems with Using Surveys Background: This district of 11-12,000 students was facing an $8 million deficit. If a levy referendum failed to pass, 150 of the 750 teachers would be eliminated. A public opinion survey was sent to 60,000 residences that included all staff and employees. The survey listed 200 programs (9 of which were music) for possible elimination. Respondents were asked to assign the following rankings to each program: Category A: Programs most important to retain Category B: Cut these programs first Category C: Save these programs if you can Preliminary Results: The voters rejected the levy referendum (probably because the teachers' union was negotiating for at 16% pay increase) and the district interpreted this as a “voter mandate” to make cuts based on survey results. The administration proposed – and the board approved – a 70% reduction in orchestra staff and a 48% reduction in band staff. Among other negative results, this would have caused the elimination of the entire elementary instrumental curriculum. The Parents Committee Takes Action: Advocates discovered only 211 surveys (out of 60,000) had been completed and returned to the district. This low response rate rendered survey results invalid and no one in the district bothered to collate actual results. However, the parents did and this is what they found:
The Real Analysis: Those who responded to the survey viewed music as equal in importance to other curricular and co-curricular subjects. Music was out-ranked only by the traditional “three R’s” and federal/state mandated programs. Music actually out-ranked all (non-music) extra-curricular activities as “most important to retain.” The administration had completely discounted the survey results EXCEPT to use the survey to justify the recommendation they had pre-planned to make throughout the entire process. I am pleased to tell you that the community music coalition united to confront the district on their faulty interpretation of the survey results and the negative impacts their recommendations would have to the music program and the entire educational system. No components of the music curriculum were eliminated, and all teaching positions in music were retained. What Should Advocates Do When Facing a Public Survey? 1) Do everything you can to keep the music curriculum off the list of potential or suggested cuts – and make sure music is not listed as co-curricular or extra-curricular; 2) Make sure music is not placed in direct competition with or above athletics, for example, giving the possible impression that cuts should be made in music first; 3) If a survey is to be used, make sure it is developed and/or reviewed by an independent researcher or survey expert before distribution and, in the case of telephone surveys, consider using a professional to conduct the interviews; 4) Make sure surveys are widely distributed and available in both downloadable (online) and printed (mailed) formats; 5) Once the survey process is complete, make sure an independent analysis of results is conducted; 6) Publish the results for community information. Until next time, John Benham |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
Organizations:
Artists:
Scott Brady |
